1
   

A "Fuming" John Kerry

 
 
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:21 am
April 23, 2005 -- WASHINGTON ?-

A fuming John Kerry had "daggers in his eyes" after a fellow Democrat promoted Hillary Rodham Clinton for president ?- suggesting the 2004 loser is green with envy at a potential rival. The flap was touched off two weeks ago when Clinton spoke at a Minneapolis Democratic dinner and Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) told the cheering crowd that he was introducing "the next great president of the United States."

Two days later, Kerry came over to Dayton on the Senate floor "with daggers in his eyes and said, 'What are you doing endorsing my 2008 presidential opponent?' . . . He was very serious," Dayton told the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Clinton's office declined comment but a friend tut-tutted: "Boys will be boys, even when they are senators."

Kerry spokesman David Wade tried to make light of the story, claiming "some lines must have gotten crossed in his retelling of this particular conversation" ?- and insisted they were mostly "joshing" about hockey.

But Dayton's office says the "daggers in his eyes" report was accurate and Dayton has no quarrel with it.

At the April 9 Minnesota dinner, Dayton made it clear that touting Clinton for president was his own idea, saying it was an "unauthorized" introduction ?- but she did nothing to dispute it.

Dayton was also quoted as offering a blunt explanation ?- not very flattering to Kerry ?- about why he favors Clinton for 2008 after backing Kerry last year: "As Winston Churchill once said, I'd rather be right than consistent."

Kerry, who will visit Minnesota on May 3, has left little doubt that he yearns to run for president again in 2008, but trails Clinton in every poll of Democratic preference by margins approaching 2-1.

A Marist College poll in February asked Americans who would get their vote if the 2008 primary were being held today. Thirty-nine percent said Sen. Clinton and only 21 percent said Kerry.

In Minnesota, Clinton thrilled Democrats with her red-meat speech, accusing President Bush of ushering in "a brave new world of extremism

She painted Republican lawmakers as "extras in the movie 'I, Robot' " and said Bush's call for an "ownership society" amounts to trying to turn America into a "you're-on-your-own society."

Clinton's fiery speech contrasted with her recent highly publicized moves to the center.

Meanwhile, Kerry ?- and his outspoken wife Teresa Heinz Kerry ?- are increasingly claiming he was robbed last November and should have won.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/45050.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(He was in Vietnam, you know).
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 9,449 • Replies: 199
No top replies

 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:23 am
I wish that John would give it up. He will NEVER become president. What I would like is a reasonable alternative to Hillary, and he ain't it!
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:47 am
I voted for Kerry...hell, I would have vote for Terri Schiavo over Bush, but he's persona non grata in 2008 if there's a lick of sense anywhere in the democratic party.

What I wish is that there was a reasonable alternative Independent candidate who had some sense AND had a prayer of winning, but those days are over.
0 Replies
 
Sanctuary
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 10:59 am
Shame, shame.

I love Kerry with every political bone in my body. My age was the only thing keeping me from giving him my vote.

Clinton, however, is full of **** and I pray daily that she will never become president. I, along with a large group of plans, have promised to move to Canada shortly after her presidency if it's the case. We would have moved with Bush's re-election, but age and financial reasons have held us back. However, we're preparing for 2008.

It never fails how the American people can be so easily brainwashed; be it by a Democrat or Republican.
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 01:46 pm
I have to wonder why anyone would post anything on this forum from the NY Post.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 02:11 pm
Re: A "Fuming" John Kerry
JustWonders wrote:
April 23, 2005 -- WASHINGTON —

. . . A Marist College poll in February asked Americans who would get their vote if the 2008 primary were being held today. Thirty-nine percent said Sen. Clinton and only 21 percent said Kerry.

In Minnesota, Clinton thrilled Democrats with her red-meat speech, accusing President Bush of ushering in "a brave new world of extremism."

She painted Republican lawmakers as "extras in the movie 'I, Robot' " and said Bush's call for an "ownership society" amounts to trying to turn America into a "you're-on-your-own society."

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/45050.htm


Clinton is on the right track.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 02:18 pm
Women make up half our population. It's time for a female President. Since Libby Dole won't run it comes down to Hilary. It's time to rid ourselves of the notion that women are incapable of steering the ship of state.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 02:29 pm
As much as I would love to have a female president, I would never vote for anyone JUST because she is a woman. I want the best candidate to win.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 02:42 pm
I would definitely vote for Hillary Clinton.

She appears to understand that the majority of citizens are moderates and abhor extremism. If she starts early enough -- inventing her own anti-extremism buzz phrases to catch the attention of the SHEEP -- I'm sure most of them would choose to graze on her side of the pasture rather than graze with the extremists.

Extremists: The hypocritical, self-ordained "people of faith" who are now ranting and raving because the rest of us don't want to dine on their less than benevolent, self-serving message of exclusion and oppression.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:09 pm
Hillary vs Condi Rice for President.
Who would win?
Either way,it would be fun to watch.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:11 pm
Duplicate post deleted by author.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:11 pm
duplicate post deleted by author
0 Replies
 
recklesssarcastic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:32 pm
Interesting question mysteryman, though it pains me to see that you have posted it thrice...I myself would vote for Hilary.But who would win remains to be seen. If they both become the candidates that is.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:44 pm
Sorry,dont know how I did that.
I do apologize
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:51 pm
Hillary in a walk. Low voter turn out. Lose the South completely. The Southern conservative is not voting for a black woman. Period.
0 Replies
 
recklesssarcastic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 03:52 pm
ah it's cool, I've had it happen before...
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 06:47 pm
Kerry took too much time to find his voice, when he did he did well at the end.

Remember, he did come from far back inthe polls.

Finding your voice-that thing which makes a connection between yourself and your audience or voters-is a vital thing. Kery took too long to find it.

Still, I can't help but think, if things go badly this term for Bush-"Al Gore".

He never got it started in 2004, but I think people will look at him again.

Reason? All the polls had him way down with a week and a half left in 2000. then he really turned up the heat. He attacked Bush directly,and made up a 10 point deficit in the popular vote in 10 days, winning a popular vote victory.

If he had started getting serious earlier, if he had found his voice a few days earlier, he would have won both the popular and electoral vote.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 06:54 pm
One incident especially sticks in my mind.

It was few days to go before the election in 2000, the polls had Bush way up.

With only a week or so to go before the balloting, Bush actually had taken a day off-he felt he was that far ahead. Gore, on the other hand, went up to the Midwest.

With his candidacy seemingly fading, (and the Republicans doing everything possible to reinforce that idea), Gore cut a forlorn figure in the Midwest, speaking hoarsely in the cold, driving rain to night time "crowds" of only a few dozen, in some cases.

It really looked like he should have just packed it in, as the polls indicated. Yet, he fought on, and got a popular vote victory, and within a hair's breadth of an electoral victory.

People who fight that hard when the chips are down, and everyone is telling them to "face reality" and pack it in, and then damn near pull it off after all-those are usually the people who come back to win eventually.
My guess is Gore in 2008.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 07:06 pm
Gore. Nah. He invented the internet, you know.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2005 07:08 pm
Oh, and when Kerry "found his voice", he had nothing to say LOL.

Except to lie about the draft, that is.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » A "Fuming" John Kerry
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/05/2026 at 11:55:59